Verdict: Side-by-side breakdown using the Bull Rankings model. CNX scored 64.7, MGY scored 58.0 — CNX leads.
Compare another set
CNX
CNX Resources Corporation
Oil & Gas E&P · Quality-Growth
64.7
$34.03 · $5.0B
fundamentals as of
Score gap
6.7
CNX leads
MGY
Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
Oil & Gas E&P · Quality-Growth
58
$24.10 · $6.6B
fundamentals as of
At a glance · who leads each dimension, on the model's own rules
CheapestCNX5.5x
Fastest growthCNX+48.9%
Strongest balance sheetMGY0.19
Highest qualityMGY91 / 100
Largest discount to fair valueCNX-66%
Side by side · every name on one set of axes
Growth against the P/E multiple. Up and to the right is cheaper and faster — the quality-growth idea in one picture. Points beyond the axis are pinned to the edge and marked off-scale rather than allowed to compress everything else.
The model, pillar by pillar (0–100 each)
CNX
stronger →← stronger
MGY
73
Qualityreturns · margins · balance sheet
91
50
Growthrevenue & earnings expansion
50
74
Valuevaluation vs sector peers
43
CNX and MGY split the three pillars evenly.
Fundamentals, head-to-head
CNX
MGY
$526mC+
FCF
$546mC+
+48.9%A
Rev
+11.4%B
0.49B
D/E
0.19A-
5.5xA
P/E
10.8xB+
1.93C+
PEG
4.26D
Winner per row is the stronger grade; where grades tie, the better figure breaks it. A true tie or a missing value shows no highlight.
Valuation · DCF cross-check
CNX
MGY
66% below
Price vs fair valuelower is cheaper
42% below
~-13%/yr
Growth the price impliesyr-1 FCF growth, fading to 4% · lower = less priced in
~-5%/yr
+138%
1-yr DCF upside
+57%
+194%
5-yr DCF upside
+73%
+303%
10-yr DCF upside
+100%
The DCF is a cross-check on intrinsic value, separate from the quality-growth score above.
Model signals
CNX
Why this score
Diluting shareholders
Cyclical growth
MGY
Why this score
Raising its dividend
Durable high returns
Cyclical growth
The companies
CNXCNX Resources Corporation
Oil & Gas E&P · $34.03 · beta 0.69
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $5.0b. Down 22% from 52-week high of $43.62 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +49% — in hypergrowth territory. 11 sell-side analysts rate this a Hold with a mean 1-yr target of $37.64 (implying +11% upside).
Moat
Net margin 44% is exceptional — pricing-power territory rare outside premium software, branded staples, and specialty pharma. ROE 21% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately.
Risk
Reserve-replacement treadmill — every barrel or ounce extracted has to be replaced through exploration or acquisition; underspending on replacement reserves shows up in production declines 2-3 years out.
MGYMagnolia Oil & Gas Corporation
Oil & Gas E&P · $24.10 · beta 0.79
Why now
Oil & Gas E&P · market cap $6.6b. Down 26% from 52-week high of $32.76 — deep drawdown territory. Revenue growing +11%, comfortably above the S&P median. 17 sell-side analysts rate this a Buy with a mean 1-yr target of $33.24 (implying +38% upside).
Moat
Net margin 29% sits well above the S&P median (~11%) — suggests structural pricing advantage or cost discipline competitors can't quickly close. ROE 20% is above 15% — the equity base is compounding at a rate the market struggles to discount accurately. FCF converts 128% of net income — earnings translate cleanly into cash.
Risk
Hedge-book exposure — many commodity producers hedge forward production; if the hedge book is concentrated at prices well below spot, the upside the market expects is already locked away.
Verdict — model-derived comparison
Generating verdict… typically 5–10 seconds
Not investment advice. The Bull Rankings publishes a quantitative ranking model and accompanying analysis for general informational purposes only. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security; nothing is personalized to your circumstances, risk tolerance, or tax situation. Investing carries the risk of loss — invest at your own risk and consider consulting a licensed financial professional before acting on anything you read here. See terms and methodology for full disclosures.
Where CNX and MGY diverge
On the headline score the gap is 6.7 points in favor of CNX. They get there differently, though — each leads on a different pillar, so the better pick depends on which you weight.
ValueCNX 73.6 · MGY 43.1CNX +30.5
QualityCNX 73.5 · MGY 90.5MGY +17.0
GrowthCNX 50.0 · MGY 50.0level
Pillars run 0–100. Value is judged against each company's own sector, so a Value score is a statement about a company relative to its own industry rather than to the other name here. A wide Value gap usually means the market already prices the difference in quality or growth — which is the trade-off this comparison comes down to.
Common questions
Is CNX or MGY the better stock?
CNX scores higher: CNX 64.7, MGY 58.0 out of 100 on the Bull Rankings quality-growth score, which blends business quality, growth and valuation into one number. A higher score means a stronger business at a more reasonable price — it is not a price target or a recommendation.
Where do CNX and MGY differ most?
The widest gap is value, where CNX leads by 31 points on the 0–100 pillar scale. Neither name sweeps: they trade the lead across the three pillars, so the comparison is a trade-off rather than one being better on every measure.
How are CNX and MGY scored?
Each carries the same 0–100 quality-growth score used everywhere on the site, built from three pillars — quality (profitability and returns on capital), growth (revenue and earnings), and value (what you pay for them) — combined as a geometric mean, so a weak pillar cannot be papered over by a strong one.
How current is this comparison?
The whole universe is re-scored every trading day after the US market close, so the scores and fundamentals here reflect the latest published edition.